Ripoff Report Needs Your Help!
X  |  CLOSE
Report: #283379

Complaint Review: Texas Direct Auto - Missouri City, Texas - Missouri City Texas

  • Submitted:
  • Updated:
  • Reported By: Garland Texas
  • Author Confirmed What's this?
  • Why?
  • Texas Direct Auto - Missouri City, Texas 1915 S Main St Missouri City, Texas U.S.A.

Texas Direct Auto - Missouri City, Texas We Sued Texas Direct for Deceptive trade practices, Negligent Misrepresentation, and Breech of Contract Missouri City Texas

*Author of original report: Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

*Author of original report: Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

*Author of original report: Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

* : Brake system RECALL was never disclosed in TDA's ad for my pickup!

Show customers why they should trust your business over your competitors...

Is this
Report about YOU
listed on other sites?
Those sites steal
Ripoff Report's
content.
We can get those
removed for you!
Find out more here.
How to fix
Ripoff Report
If your business is
willing to make a
commitment to
customer satisfaction
Click here now..

Last week a court in Dallas County issued a multi thousand dollar judgement against Texas Direct Auto finding that Texas Direct Auto had engaged in:

1. Deceptive trade practices,
2. Negligent Misrepresentation, and
3. Breech of Contract.

Texas Direct also lost an appeal for a retrial and Texas Direct lost a venue hearing in an attempt to move the hearing to Fort Bend County out of Dallas County. So far we have prevailed against Texas Direct every time we have met them in court. We are not waiting to see if Texas Direct Auto will pay or will continue to drag things out with further appeals.

At issue was a car sold by Texas Direct to my wife and I that experienced a catastrophic failure and thousands of dollars in repairs during the first 2 weeks after purchase. I will be posting the pleadings of this case in the near future should anyone be interested in the facts of the case.

Randall
Garland, Texas
U.S.A.

This report was posted on Ripoff Report on 11/06/2007 05:50 PM and is a permanent record located here: https://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/texas-direct-auto-missouri-city-texas/missouri-city-texas-77489/texas-direct-auto-missouri-city-texas-we-sued-texas-direct-for-deceptive-trade-practice-283379. The posting time indicated is Arizona local time. Arizona does not observe daylight savings so the post time may be Mountain or Pacific depending on the time of year. Ripoff Report has an exclusive license to this report. It may not be copied without the written permission of Ripoff Report. READ: Foreign websites steal our content

Search for additional reports

If you would like to see more Rip-off Reports on this company/individual, search here:

Report & Rebuttal
Respond to this report!
What's this?
Also a victim?
What's this?
Repair Your Reputation!
What's this?

Updates & Rebuttals

REBUTTALS & REPLIES:
0Author
4Consumer
0Employee/Owner

#4

Brake system RECALL was never disclosed in TDA's ad for my pickup!

AUTHOR: TODD - (USA)

POSTED: Sunday, August 30, 2009

I too was "taken for a ride" by Texas Direct Auto! They use "AUTOCHEK" to verify the condition of their vehicles, never heard of them. After I bought my pickup, stupid me, I did a "CARFAX" check and found that there was a brake system recall on my vehicle that had NOT been performed.


 The recall involved a brake system failure possibility! Brakes failing on me could lead to someone's death! This has to be Illegal! 


 Randall in Garland, TX. I would sure like to see that pdf file that you have and get the name of the Law Firm that you used to sue TDA. I'm not sure how you would get the info to me but I would like to see it!


 TDA listed "normal wear" on the cosmetics of the vehicle. 27 nicks, dings, and scratches that had all been disguised with cheap touch up paint! A 3 yr old vehicle, with 40,000 miles, with 27 touched up nicks, dings, and large scratches isn't "normal wear."


 MISrepresented and NONrepresented issues: The windshield and hood has been replaced, vehicle has been in a hailstorm, roof of the vehicle is beat to hail, acid spilled in the bed of the pickup, no lug wrench or related accessories to lower the spare if needed, no owner's manual.  


 TDA said, in their ad, that the vehicle was a fleet/lease vehicle. CARFAX states that it was a private party, one owner, vehicle. This is just some of the DECEPTION from TEXAS DIRECT AUTO!


 Texas Direct Auto also said that they woul let me know when a shipping company was leaving with my pickup, the name of the company, contact info, and the driver's name and phone number. The first time I heard that someone was going to deliver my pickup was when the driver called me and said that he was about 4 hours away. Thank goodness it was on a Saturday and I was home! 


 More of the lies, deception, and nondisclosures from Texas Direct Auto! I saw the vehicle on ebay. I bid on the vehicle, and was the hig bidder, but the "Reserve" was not met and the auction ended and then Relisted. The next day TDA contacted me and offered me the vehicle and stated that they needed some "buyer's information" to get the transaction rolling. Also illegal per ebay's rules if i'm not mistaken!


 I just returned from a 2000 mile trip and had no mechanical issues, knock on wood! Unless you are going to see the vehicle In Person, I WOULD NOT BUY from Texas Direct Auto.


 Thanks for this forum Ripoff Report!


 Sincerely, Todd from TX/CO   


  


     

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#3 Author of original report

Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

AUTHOR: Randall - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 11, 2007

The sentence above should read: "We are now waiting to see if Texas Direct Auto will pay or will continue to drag things out with further appeals." The word "not" is incorrect since we have no choice but to wait.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#2 Author of original report

Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

AUTHOR: Randall - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 11, 2007

The sentence above should read: "We are now waiting to see if Texas Direct Auto will pay or will continue to drag things out with further appeals." The word "not" is incorrect since we have no choice but to wait.

Respond to this report!
What's this?

#1 Author of original report

Texas Direct Auto - Court Case

AUTHOR: Randall - (U.S.A.)

POSTED: Sunday, November 11, 2007

The sentence above should read: "We are now waiting to see if Texas Direct Auto will pay or will continue to drag things out with further appeals." The word "not" is incorrect since we have no choice but to wait.

Respond to this report!
What's this?
Featured Reports

Advertisers above have met our
strict standards for business conduct.

X
What do hackers,
questionable attorneys and
fake court orders have in common?
...Dishonest Reputation Management Investigates Reputation Repair
Free speech rights compromised

WATCH News
Segment Now